Curious to get peoples thoughts on this. I understand the benefits of a silencer from a health & safety perspective as well as reduced recoil. However, I assume few other countries ever use them. Yes, our land mass is smaller and that needs to be factored in. But I still don't fully see the benefits from a stalking perspective. I can zero my rifle at the range in Bisley with my hearing protectors . When I am on a stalk, if i'm successful, I will take 1 or worse case 2 shots. Is that really that bad for the hearing? Still seems to me that the case for silencers (from a deer stalking perspective) is more about where we live rather than health & safety?
Silencers - is it all about health & safety?
- Thread starter KB1
- Start date
It's all about my hearing (or what's left of it). I've shot for nearly 50 years and I don't want to end my days like my Dad who is as deaf as a post. Regards JCS
With an added bonus in some cases, of reduced recoil, retention of sight picture, & attendant accuracy.
I would say its mostly about health and safety, in most other country's they are banned for stalking purposes
30 or so years ago you would have had great difficulty getting one here for a full bore rifle, now its all about health and safety even the FEOs are encouraging you to have them put on your ticket at renewal time, whether you actually want one or not.
30 or so years ago you would have had great difficulty getting one here for a full bore rifle, now its all about health and safety even the FEOs are encouraging you to have them put on your ticket at renewal time, whether you actually want one or not.
CWMMAN3738
Well-Known Member
Try using them with sub-sonic rounds then they make a huge difference to
Jager SA
Well-Known Member
As above plus the hearing protection factor and the fact that I can have one. The law wouldn't need much of an excuse to prevent silencers if they could but they can't now because their use is driven by H&S now. I recall In The early days they were against granting them but as soon as you asked for that in writing they soon changed their tune!
Last edited:
Remember that for some pro stalkers, thats on or two shots day in, day out, for decades.
The scientists reckon that in the wrong conditions/location - just one shot can be enough to permanently damage your ears.
sure, there are myriad other benefits, from recoil to less disturbance and the chance of shooting more than one deer, but its still primarily H&S based - and I remember when I started out, as pointed out above, that you couldn't get one for love nor money - and the FC rangers were all driving round with earmuffs on one ear so they could hear the van radio and still get out to take a quick shot if they saw a deer.
Last edited:
+1!The other factor is less disturbance in sensitive areas, such as proximal to horses etc,however the mod can still cause them to spook in my experience,I would always zero with the mod fitted especially if I am working up a load..MY LANDOWNERS DO NOT WANT CONTINUOUS RIFLE SHOTS and I do it out of respect to them as stated,TRY FOXING AT NIGHT UNMODDED IT WOULD NOT BE POPULAR EVEN IF YOU HAD NOTIFIED PLOD ,ANTIS JUST WISH TO CAUSE US HASSLE 
+1 for finnbear 270 above, its too late once your hearing is damaged and its not just being deaf you could get tinnitus for the rest of your days. damage is cumulative and I have some permanent damage via shooting and work. Six un-moderated zeroing shots with standard sonic ear plugs in gave me mild tinnitus for two weeks. moderators are excellent.
Protecting your hearing is the main reason, not disturbing the neighbours and frightening livestock are all good reasons though.
Like many people, I don't use rifles a fantastic amount, but I shoot game, practice on clays occasionally and I also ride a motorbike. All activities that can affect the hearing and there's a cumulative effect.
Like many people, I don't use rifles a fantastic amount, but I shoot game, practice on clays occasionally and I also ride a motorbike. All activities that can affect the hearing and there's a cumulative effect.
sussex stalker
Well-Known Member
The main benefits of a moderator for stalking are:
Ear protection
Less disturbance to the public
Increased accuracy due to less recoil (not anticipating the shot and causing a slight flinch)
Very often allowing you to identify shot placement from being able to hear the bullet strike
Against:
Exrta weight added to the rifle
Retained heat if shooting a number of shots in a short space of time
Cost of purchase
All said, If you can afford to have a moderator fitted you will find it a very useful bit of kit!
Ear protection
Less disturbance to the public
Increased accuracy due to less recoil (not anticipating the shot and causing a slight flinch)
Very often allowing you to identify shot placement from being able to hear the bullet strike
Against:
Exrta weight added to the rifle
Retained heat if shooting a number of shots in a short space of time
Cost of purchase
All said, If you can afford to have a moderator fitted you will find it a very useful bit of kit!
Historically silenced weapons were the preserve of assassins and to a lesser degree snipers. So people only used them to be sneaky whilst killing people. Such things would never do for the general public because you could only be up to no good! You had to have a double "0" number to have one! This obviously persists in a lot of places today. In fact, when you think about it, it's the only reason we still have to have them on certificates in the UK, because they're not an integral part of a rifle that is needed for it to work.
Jager SA
Well-Known Member
I've made silencers myself from coke bottles and oil filters, it's a Blue Peter job any day of the week! These other countries and ours need to wake up, they are easy to make in your garage. So if your thinking of getting all splinter cell/day of the jackal, you're hardly going ask for a silencer are you! Doh!
Similar threads
